Originally Posted by Mainad
The fact that Roddick briefly held the number # 1 ranking is the only thing that gives him the edge at the moment. If Murray ever gets that or wins another Slam, then it will be case closed in his favour.
A good topic is who really deserved the year end #1 of 2003. That is the whole key here since Roddick didnt just rank #1 briefly, he ended a year ranked #1 so officaly was #1 for a whole year. That is a big thing on the ATP (unlike the WTA where its relevance is almost squat now). However it was a very close year where 4 players arguably had the case:
Roddick vs Federer- Roddick had much better slam showings with win, two semis, and a 1st round loss vs Federer win, two 4th rounds, and a 1st round loss. Roddick won 2 Masters, Federer won 0. However Federer won the WTF, and won the most titles of anyone that year 7 (vs 6 for Roddick). Federer was also 2-1 vs Roddick that year, and drubbed him in their 2 more important meetings.
Ferrero- The only player to reach 2 slam finals this year, a slam title on clay in Paris, and a slam runner up on hard courts in New York. Won a Masters title on both clay and fast indoor court, showing great versatility. Consistent slam results of quarters, win, 4th round, runner up. Only 4 titles for overall year however.
Agassi- Consistent performer in slams with a win, quarters, 4th round, and semis, no truly poor slams unlike the other 3. A final at the WTF. One Masters title in Miami.
Looking back it is very close between Roddick, Federer, and Ferrero.